Opinion of Nuclear Energy

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

So we don't derail other threads about this.

This is one issue I've changed my mind on since about a year ago. Ask me then, and I would have said that nuclear was overhated, reliable and necessary in the battle against climate change. Increasingly however I'm cynical of the whole shebang, so I'm voting Horrible (and misguided) Energy.

(And in this poll I mean current nuclear fission technologies, not any other varient that is two hundred years from commercialisation like breeders)

[politicus]

A necessary evil in the current climate crisis, but far from unproblematic. Nuclear waste management being the biggest problem.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Nuclear fission plants are crappy.
Nuclear fusion has more promise.

[Maxwell]

Either way Freedom Energy, obviously.

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

Either way Freedom Energy, obviously.

[Antonio the Sixth]

A necessary evil in the current climate crisis, but far from unproblematic. Nuclear waste management being the biggest problem.

This.

[TNF]

Freedom Energy, especially as we manage to develop fusion reactors.

[Cory]

Freedom Energy, especially as we manage to develop fusion reactors.

[muon2]

For waste management the nearest technology of choice should be a subcritical reactor using an accelerator driven system. An ADS can destroy heavy long-lived radionuclides while generating electricity, reducing the waste stream by a factor of 100 and the storage time by a factor of 1000. MYRRHA in Belgium is one of the pilots under construction for this type of technology, scheduled for full operation by 2025.

[bedstuy]

We ought to be building a lot more nuclear plants to replace coal fired power plants. 

In terms of cost to human life and the environment, nuclear is far superior to coal.  Coal plants emit tons of CO2, SO2, NOx, particulate matter and traces of gnarly mineral elements from the coal like mercury, uranium, arsenic and lead.  Coal mining has the same problems and coal mining itself is dangerous and kills people.  And, then there's the thermal pollution that kills fish.

If tomorrow every coal plant was shut down and replace with nuclear, total greenhouse gas emissions would go down 25%, most environmental toxin emissions (mercury,etc) could go down 50% or more, particulate emissions would go down a lot.  It would be great for the environment.

[Mr. Smith]

necessary evil

[Murica!]

A necessary evil in the current climate crisis, but far from unproblematic. Nuclear waste management being the biggest problem.

This.

[Tender Branson]

Wouldn't be needed if humanity stopped reproducing like rats.

Everything would be much easier if the world population would only be 10 million instead of the soon 10 billion and renewables would be plenty available.

[Brewer]

A necessary evil in the current climate crisis, but far from unproblematic. Nuclear waste management being the biggest problem.

This.

[H. Ross Peron]

Massive FE (Not a fan of Global Warming, black lungs, or energy dependence upon sociopathic reactionary theocratic absolute monarchs).

[windjammer]

Terrible energy. Hiroshima, Nagazaki, Tchernobyl,...

[Franzl]

I don't really have a problem with it per se, but it's not the solution to everything the way its proponents pretend. Not even for economical reasons.
I think the German government was too early in phasing it out, but I basically support the desired outcome of the energy reforms and certainly would not advocate building new nuclear power plants.

[TNF]

Terrible energy. Hiroshima, Nagazaki, Tchernobyl,...

One of these things is not like the others.

[windjammer]

Terrible energy. Hiroshima, Nagazaki, Tchernobyl,...

One of these things is not like the others.

What do you mean?

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

TIL we dropped nuclear power plants on Japan

[ElectionsGuy]

FE

[Sumner 1868]

Terribly violate.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Wouldn't be needed if humanity stopped reproducing like rats.

Everything would be much easier if the world population would only be 10 million instead of the soon 10 billion and renewables would be plenty available.

Would a population of 10 million even be able to diversify and produce enough to sustain a high-tech renewable energy economy?

On nuclear energy, I don't know. We shouldn't be hysterically shutting down nuclear energy plants, but with the investment of time and money in expanding I'm not sure there isn't a more sensible, sustainable long-term alternative.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Freedom energy, but not without its problems.

[TDAS04]

A necessary evil in the current climate crisis, but far from unproblematic. Nuclear waste management being the biggest problem.

This.